Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

General Discussion

Riftaxe

(2,693 posts)

2. This would be awesome

Reply to WilliamPitt (Original post)

Wed Feb 5, 2014, 04:58 PM

Feb 2014

Considering here in NH, I will have the likely option of voting for the current air headed idiot in office or a republican in the next Governer's race, none of the above would presumably be an outstanding option.

There is no way in hell I will cast another vote for Hassan the halfwit...if only we could get Lynch back.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

10 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

New Hampshire House bill would let you vote for 'none of the above' [View all] WilliamPitt Feb 2014 OP

Holding elections is expensive frazzled Feb 2014 #1

Maybe it would force them to run better candidates. If they can't field candidates people El_Johns Feb 2014 #8

This would be awesome Riftaxe Feb 2014 #2

Big fan of this idea! 1000words Feb 2014 #3

Is there a requirement that someone vote for each office on the ballot? If not, then by not voting okaawhatever Feb 2014 #4

No, you haven't. By not voting you just limit the pool from which A or B are selected. By voting El_Johns Feb 2014 #9

Good idea! Let the people express their displeasure with "politics as usual". K&R Tierra_y_Libertad Feb 2014 #5

Nevada has had this for years. Jim Lane Feb 2014 #6

Meh. It's a plank of the Libertarian platform, which gives me pause Recursion Feb 2014 #7

seems lazy to me JI7 Feb 2014 #10